View Presentation/Handout
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Quantifying Vocal Repertoire Tessituras Through Real-Time Measures Matthew Schloneger, PhD, MM, Friends University Eric J. Hunter, PhD, Dept of Communicative Sciences and Disorders, Michigan State University Lynn Maxfield, PhD, National Center for Voice and Speech Selecting Appropriate Student Repertoire Voice teachers use experience and anecdotal evidence when selecting repertoire for students: • Range • Tessitura • Passaggio points • “Weight” • “Color” • Pedagogical goals Tessitura, however, is something that has until recently remained un- quantified by scientific methods. The acquisition of singer Voice Range Profiles combined with the quantification of repertoire tessituras could help voice teachers scientifically choose repertoire that is a good “fit” for individual voices Previous Studies Titze, Ingo, “Quantifying Tessitura in a Song." Journal of Singing, 65:1 (September 2008), 59–61. Hanrahan, Kevin. "Use of the Voice Range Profile in Assigning Repertoire: An Evaluation." NATS National Conference, Salt Lake City, UT, July 2010 (Best Poster Award) Nix, John, "Measuring Mozart: A Pilot Study Testing the Accuracy of Objective Methods for Matching a Song to a Singer.” Journal of Singing, 70:5 (June 2014), 561-572 Titze – Tessituragram of “Il mio tesoro” from Don Giovanni- Mozart Nix – VRP overlaying Tessituragram Purpose Statement The purpose of this study was be to examine the use of dosimetry-derived tessituragrams and Voice Range Profiles (VRPs) in selecting appropriate voice repertoire for singing students. Research Questions 1. How do dosimetry-derived tessituragrams compare to score-derived tessituragrams of the same selection in the same key? 2. How do dosimetry-derived tessituragrams of the same vocal selection (“Il mio bel foco…Quella fiamma” by Benedetto Marcello) compare when performed in three different keys each by four different female singers?; 3. How do singer VRPs compare with their tessituragrams of three performances of this aria, each sung in a different key?; 4. How do singer and expert panel perceptions of the aria’s “fit” in three different keys align with the overlay of singer VRPs with tessituragrams? Methods Each singer (N=4) completed the following: Demographic profile Voice Range Profile –Voice Dosimeter Aria recording – Recorded with Voice Dosimeter and Hall Microphone --Three repetitions in random order of “Quella fiamma” (Schimer Complete 28 Italian Songs and Arias in 5 Keys, Ed. Parisotti) 1. Singer’s accustomed key 2. Adjacent higher key 3. Adjacent lower key Singer Perception Questionnaire Expert Panel Questionnaire (N=5) ◦ Random order listening Ambulator Monitoring - Voice Dosimeter • Sonovox AB VoxLogTM portable voice analyzer collar • Standard digital recorder Recording Arias were recorded simultaneously with the voice dosimeter and a hall microphone The Hall microphone recorded .wav audio files of the choir using a ZOOM H6 device (XY microphone attachment, 90 degree angle) at a 44.1 kHz sampling rate (16 bits). Singer Perceptual Survey Each singer responded to the following questions on a separate page following each song repetition: When in singing the selection, I perceived (mark a tic on the scale): My overall ease in singing: Easy |----------------------------------------------------------| Difficult High notes: Easy |----------------------------------------------------------| Difficult Low notes: Easy |----------------------------------------------------------| Difficult Register transitions: Easy |----------------------------------------------------------| Difficult Overall “weight” of the selection: Easy |----------------------------------------------------------| Difficult Participants 1. 17-year old soprano, college freshman, 3 years voice lessons, 4 years choir 2. 18-year old soprano, college freshman, 1 year of voice lessons, 13 years choral experience 3. 21-year-old mezzo-soprano, college senior, 3 years of voice lessons, 16 years choral experience 4. 37-year-old soprano, professional singer, 10 years of voice lessons, 10 years choral experience None of the singers reported current vocal pathologies or a history of vocal pathologies VoxLog Data Processing Initial data processed using Goldwave v5.70 digital audio editing software (normalizing volume, splitting files, etc) MATLAB Dosimeter Analysis Expert Panel Five (5) experienced vocal pedagogues listened to all 12 excerpts in random order and responded to a series of 5 questions regarding the efficiency of vocal production Mark with a vertical line on the scale: Overall ease in singing: Free/Efficient |___________________________________________________| Strained/Inefficient High notes: Free/Efficient |___________________________________________________| Strained/Inefficient Low notes: Free/Efficient |___________________________________________________| Strained/Inefficient Register transitions: Free/Efficient |___________________________________________________| Strained/Inefficient Overall “weight” of the selection Free/Efficient |___________________________________________________| Strained/Inefficient Results Score-Based Tessituragram Quella fiamma-Medium High (Key of Am) Recit: 55 bpm; Aria: 100 bpm Cycle dose Time dose per pitch 15000 35.00 14000 13000 30.00 12000 11000 25.00 10000 9000 20.00 8000 Time in 7000 seconds 15.00 6000 5000 10.00 4000 3000 2000 5.00 1000 0 0.00 F5 F4 B4 F3 A3 C#4/Db4 F4 A4 Db5 F5 A5 B3 A5 A4 G5 G4 Eb5 Eb4 Db5 C#4/… Musical Pitches Tessituragram 10 15 20 25 30 35 0 5 F3 Gb… G3 Ab… (Dose Time) Time) (Dose A3 Bb… B3 C4 C#… D4 Eb4 – Score compared to Dosimeter to compared Score E4 F4 Gb4 G4 Ab4 A4 Bb4 B4 C5 Db5 D5 Eb5 E5 F5 Dose Time - Score-based estimate vs Dosimeter Reading 160 140 120 100 80 Actual Dt (s) 60 Expected Dt (s) 40 20 0 17yo 17yo 17yo 18yo 18yo 18yo 21 yo 21 yo 21 yo 37 yo 37 yo 37 yo Sop H Sop Sop M Sop H Sop Sop M Mez Mez M Mez Sop H Sop Sop M (Bm) MH (Fm) (Bm) MH (Fm) MH (Fm) ML (Bm) MH (Fm) (Am) (Am) (Am) (Em) (Am) Cyce Dose (Dc) - Score-Based estimate vs. Dosimeter Reading 80000 70000 60000 50000 40000 Actual Dc 30000 Expected Dc 20000 10000 0 17yo 17yo 17yo 18yo 18yo 18yo 21 yo 21 yo 21 yo 37 yo 37 yo 37 yo Sop H Sop Sop M Sop H Sop Sop M Mez Mez M Mez Sop H Sop Sop M (Bm) MH (Fm) (Bm) MH (Fm) MH (Fm) ML (Bm) MH (Fm) (Am) (Am) (Am) (Em) (Am) Voice Range Profiles Song Range Profile/Tessituragram Voice Range Profile Accelerometer (Voice Source) vs. Audio (Source + Filter) Accel. Audio Low High Song Tessituragrams (SRP) – Three Keys Song Range Profile (SRP) boxed areas equal 68.2% of all voicing – A visualization of tessitura A larger area means a greater dynamic range was used in performance Singer 1 – VRP Area overlayed with SRP Areas __ VRP - - - Bm ___ Am - . - Fm Singer 2 – VRP Area overlayed with SRP Areas __ VRP - - - Bm - . - Am ___ Fm Singer 3 – VRP Area overlayed with SRP Areas __ VRP ___ Am - . - Fm - - - Em Singer 4 – VRP Area overlayed with SRP Areas __ VRP - - - Bm ___ Am - . - Fm Singer Perception Average of All Questions - Self Perception Higher indicates less ease 100.00 90.00 80.00 70.00 60.00 Higher Key 50.00 Usual Key 40.00 Lower Key 30.00 20.00 10.00 0.00 17-yo Soprano 18-yo Soprano 21-yo Mezzo 37-yo Soprano Avg Overall Ease in Singing - Self Perception Higher indicates less ease 100.00 90.00 80.00 70.00 60.00 Higher Key 50.00 Usual Key 40.00 Lower Key 30.00 20.00 10.00 0.00 17-yo Soprano 18-yo Soprano 21-yo Mezzo 37-yo Soprano Avg Register Transitions - Self Perception Higher indicates less ease 100.00 90.00 80.00 70.00 60.00 Higher Key 50.00 Usual Key 40.00 Lower Key 30.00 20.00 10.00 0.00 17-yo Soprano 18-yo Soprano 21-yo Mezzo 37-yo Soprano Avg Expert Panel Inter-Rater Reliability Intraclass 95% Confidence F Test Correlation/ Interval Cronbach’s Lower Upper Value df1 df2 Alpha Bound Bound Overall Ease of singing .612 .108 .873 2.579 11 44 High Notes .736 .391 .913 3.782 11 44 Low Notes .392 -.400 .800 1.644 11 44 Register Transitions .239 -.752 .750 1.314 11 44 Weight .598 .075 .868 2.487 11 44 Average .473 .228 .658 1.898 59 236 Singer Perception vs Panel Perception Average of All Questions Average of All Questions Self Perception Expert Panel Perception Higher indicates less ease Higher indicates less ease 100.00 100.00 90.00 90.00 Higher Key 80.00 80.00 Usual Key 70.00 70.00 Lower Key 60.00 60.00 50.00 50.00 40.00 40.00 30.00 30.00 20.00 20.00 10.00 10.00 0.00 0.00 17-yo 18-yo 21-yo 37-yo Avg 17-yo 18-yo 21-yo 37-yo Avg Soprano Soprano Mezzo Soprano Soprano Soprano Mezzo Soprano Overall Ease in Singing Overall Ease in Singing Self Perception Expert Panel Perception Higher indicates less ease Higher indicates less ease 100.00 100.0 Higher Key 90.00 90.0 80.00 80.0 Usual Key 70.00 70.0 Lower Key 60.00 60.0 50.00 50.0 40.00 40.0 30.00 30.0 20.00 20.0 10.00 10.0 0.00 0.0 17-yo 18-yo 21-yo 37-yo Avg 17-yo 18-yo 21-yo 37-yo Avg Soprano Soprano Mezzo Soprano Soprano Soprano Mezzo Soprano Register Transitions Register Transitions Self Perception Expert Panel Perceptions Higher indicates less ease Higher indicates less ease 100.00 100.0 Higher Key 90.00 90.0 Usual Key 80.00 80.0 70.00 70.0 Lower Key 60.00 60.0 50.00 50.0 40.00 40.0 30.00 30.0 20.00 20.0 10.00 10.0 0.00 0.0 17-yo 18-yo 21-yo 37-yo Avg 17-yo 18-yo 21-yo 37-yo Avg Soprano Soprano Mezzo Soprano Soprano Soprano Mezzo Soprano Singer 1 (17yo Soprano) – VRP/SRP Areas vs Perception __ VRP - - - Bm ___ Am - .